Heavy meteal rules. Vardan Adibekyan Institute of Astrophysics and Space Sciences. The star-planet connection. 1 June 2015 NAOJ, Tokyo

Transcription

1 The star-planet connection Institute of Astrophysics and Space Sciences 1 June 2015 NAOJ, Tokyo

2 1 Introduction to exoplanets Diversity of exoplanets Planet formation theories 2 Planet formation and metallicity Giant planets Low-mass planets Planets around evolved stars 3 Planet formation: Importance of other elements Heavy elements in the metal-poor regime 4 Planet architecture and metallicity Period, mass, eccentricity, and [Fe/H]: previous works Period-mass diagram and [Fe/H] with SWEET-Cat 5 Conclusion

3 Outline 1 Introduction to exoplanets Diversity of exoplanets Planet formation theories 2 Planet formation and metallicity Giant planets Low-mass planets Planets around evolved stars 3 Planet formation: Importance of other elements Heavy elements in the metal-poor regime 4 Planet architecture and metallicity Period, mass, eccentricity, and [Fe/H]: previous works Period-mass diagram and [Fe/H] with SWEET-Cat 5 Conclusion

4 1924 confirmed and 4600 planet candidates (Kepler) 483 multiple planet systems RV planets Transit planets Other planets Figure: M P vs. year of discovery (

5 The spread in planetary properties Figure: Period vs. mass (

6 The spread in planetary properties Hot Jupiters Very eccentric planets (even e > 0.9) Extremely short period planets (P < 1 day) Evaporating planets... New planet formation theories needed Figure: Period vs. mass (

7 The two main formation theories Core-accretion The formation of a giant planet begins with planetesimal coagulation and cor formation (similar to terrestrial planets) which then attract gas, first slowly, and then in a runaway state. Safronov & Svagina (1969), Pollack et al. (1996) Gravitational instability Giant planets form by the gravitational fragmentation in the protoplanetary disk surrounding young stars Boss (1997)

8 Core-accretion Formation in three phases: I. Accretion of planetesimals within the gravitational reach II. Slow envelope accretion (formation time is defined by phase II) III. Runaway (rapid) gas accretion (when M gas = M core = 5-20 M ) The model explains formation of giant (not very massive) and rocky planets at not very large orbits (but see Kikuchi et al and at not very low metallicities). See e.g. Ida & Lin 2004; Mordasini 2009,2012; Hasegawa & Pudritz 2014

9 Gravitational instability Figure: 3D simulations by Mayer et al Giant planets form extremely rapidly, due to fragmentation of the disk under specific conditions (very cool and massive disks etc). The model explains formation of gas giants (with and without cores) and possibly rocky planets at large distances (but see Nayakshin 2015a,b,c). See. e.g. Boss 1997, 2011, Mayer et al. 2007; Boley 2009; Vorobyov & Basu 2010

10 CA vs./and GI The two processes can be complementary Figure: Courtesy L. Close (2010).

11 Outline 1 Introduction to exoplanets Diversity of exoplanets Planet formation theories 2 Planet formation and metallicity Giant planets Low-mass planets Planets around evolved stars 3 Planet formation: Importance of other elements Heavy elements in the metal-poor regime 4 Planet architecture and metallicity Period, mass, eccentricity, and [Fe/H]: previous works Period-mass diagram and [Fe/H] with SWEET-Cat 5 Conclusion

12 Different planet formation scenarios offer different observationally testable signatures However, mixed theories together with some physical processes (e.g. migration, scattering) and specific initial conditions can explain EVERYTHING Core-accretion Giant planet - metallicity correlation Efficiency dust-to-gas ratio = M/H Fe/H Gravitational instability Giant planet - no (apparent) metallicity correlation

13 Giant planets Apparent correlation between stellar metallicity and giant planet frequency (e.g. Gonzalez et al. 1998, Santos et al. 2001,2004, Fischer & Valenti 2005, Sousa et al. 2011). Figure: From Santos et al (left) and from Sousa et al (right).

14 Giant planets - metallicity: the functional form Is the planet formation mechanism the same at low and high metallicities?

15 Giant planets - metallicity: the functional form Bayesian analysis with different functional forms Flat or exponential - no statistical difference. Mortier et al. 2013a

16 Low-mass planets No correlation found for Super-Earth/Neptune-like planets? e.g. Sousa et al. 2011, Mayor et al. 2011, Buchhave et al Figure: From Sousa et al (left) and from Buchhave et al (right).

17 Small-size planets: Boundary at 2R? The sample Kepler multi-planet candidates Parameters KIC Figure: Wang & Fischer 2013, submitted

18 Small-size planets: Boundary at 2R? Planet-metallicity correlation for all but planets with R P < 2R Figure: Wang & Fischer 2013, submitted

19 Small-size planets: Boundary at 2R? The sample Planet candidates from Buchhave et al B14 Parameters B14 and KIC corrected according B14

20 Small-size planets: Boundary at 2R? A universal planet-metallicity correlation for all planets Figure: Wang & Fischer 2015, accepted

21 Small-size planets: Boundary at 2R? Three size regimes of exoplanets: Boundaries at 1.7R and 3.9R Metallicity controls the structure of planetary systems. Three distinct populations of planets with different metallicities. R P < 1.7R E - terrestrial-like planets 1.7R E < R P < 3.9R E - gas dwarf planets with rocky cores R P > 3.9R E - ice or gas giant planets Figure: Buchhave et al. 2014

22 Small-size planets: Boundary at 2R? No evidence for the proposed radius boundary at 1.7 R p value Terrestrial? Gas dwarfs? Ice/gas giants Planet radius [R Earth ] Figure: Schlaufman 2015

23 Small-size planets: Important but difficult Planet frequency vs. metallicity is very important to constrain the formation theories, but it is difficult from the observational point of view. Difficult to create a comparison sample (especially in the transit surveys). Figure: Hasegawa & Pudritz 2014 (left) and Nayakshin 2015 (right)

24 Evolved stars with giant planets 0.25 Red giant hosts - TS13 Red comparison stars Relative frequency [Fe/H] - TS13 No metallicity correlation? Evidence for planet engulfment? (Pasquini et al. 2007) A mass effect? (Ghezzi et al. 2010) A spectroscopic analysis issue? (Hekker & Meléndez 2007; Santos et al. 2009) There is a correlation after all? (Quirrenbach et al. 2011; Reffert et al. 2015) Figure: Mortier et al. 2013b.

25 Evolved stars with giant planets A selection bias? (Mortier et al. 2013b). Missing metal-rich stars in the giant star sample from (giant) planet search programs due to B-V cuts. Takeda et al da Silva et al Zielinski et al Giant planet hosts

26 Planet - metallicity A lot has been done in this field but there are still many open questions and conflicting observations and theories.

27 Outline 1 Introduction to exoplanets Diversity of exoplanets Planet formation theories 2 Planet formation and metallicity Giant planets Low-mass planets Planets around evolved stars 3 Planet formation: Importance of other elements Heavy elements in the metal-poor regime 4 Planet architecture and metallicity Period, mass, eccentricity, and [Fe/H]: previous works Period-mass diagram and [Fe/H] with SWEET-Cat 5 Conclusion

28 Are stars with planets chemically different? Previous studies yielded contradictory results Most studies found no systematic difference in abundances (Takeda 2007; Bond et al. 2008; Neves et al. 2009; Delgado Mena et al. 2010) Possible enrichment in some species (Bodaghee et al. 2003; Robinson et al. 2006; Brugamyer et al. 2011; Kang et al. 2011)

29 Refractory elements Figure: [X/Fe] vs. [Fe/H] for HARPS sample. Adibekyan et al. 2012a. Element enhancement of planet hosts Mg,Ti, Si, Sc, and Al at [Fe/H] -0.2 dex

30 α-elements Figure: HARPS + Kepler samples. Adibekyan et al. 2012b.

31 α-elements Planet frequency 12.3 ± 4.1% Planet frequency 2.2 ± 1.3% Figure: HARPS + Kepler samples. Adibekyan et al. 2012b.

32 [Fe/H] [M/H] at low metallicities

33 Planet frequency and [Ref] index [Ref] - the mass abundances of Mg, Si and Fe relative to the Sun Figure: Gonzalez 2014.

34 Planet frequency and [Ref] index Figure: Adibekyan et al Super-Earths (blue), giants (red)

35 Interior structure of planets and chemical elements Figure: Dorn et al Observations of mass and radius are sufficient to constrain core size Stellar elemental abundances (Fe, Si, Mg) are principal constraints to reduce degeneracy in interior structure models and to constrain mantle composition

36 Outline 1 Introduction to exoplanets Diversity of exoplanets Planet formation theories 2 Planet formation and metallicity Giant planets Low-mass planets Planets around evolved stars 3 Planet formation: Importance of other elements Heavy elements in the metal-poor regime 4 Planet architecture and metallicity Period, mass, eccentricity, and [Fe/H]: previous works Period-mass diagram and [Fe/H] with SWEET-Cat 5 Conclusion

37 Dawson & Murray-Clay (2013) Close-in giant planets orbiting metal-poor stars have lower eccentricities than those orbiting metal-rich stars.

38 Dawson & Murray-Clay (2013) Metal-poor Metal-rich Rebekah Dawson CfA Smooth disk migration Dynamical interactions Close-in giant planets orbiting metal-poor stars have lower eccentricities than those orbiting metal-rich stars. Giant planets orbiting metal-rich stars show signatures of planet-planet interactions R. Dawson & R. Murray-Clay 2013, ApJ, 767, L24

39 Tsang, Turner, & Cumming 2014 In the shadowed region (0.1-1 AU), lack of gap insolation allows disk interactions to damp eccentricity. Outside such shadowed regions stellar illumination can heat the planetary gaps and drive eccentricity growth for giant planets.

40 Beaugé & Nesvorniý (2013) A lack of R 4R planets with periods P < 5 days around metal-poor stars A paucity of sub-jovian planets around metal-poor stars with P < 100 days Small planets around metal-poor stars do not migrate far Disk migration?

41 SWEET-Cat: a catalog of stellar parameters for stars with planets Homogeneous stellar parameters. Santos et al Over 65% of all planet host stars known More than 90% of all stars with RV-detected planets

42 P-M P diagram and [Fe/H] with SWEET-Cat [Fe/H] >= -0.1 [Fe/H] < -0.1 Planets around metal-poor stars Have longer periods than planets around metal-rich stars ( 10M < M P < 4M Jup ). Form farther out Form later and do not have time to migrate far Giant planets show long periods (>100 days) Migration is less rapid than assumed Figure: P-M P from Adibekyan et al

43 P-M P diagram and [Fe/H] with SWEET-Cat: Earth-like planets No metal-rich planet with long period Detection bias? If not, then Metal-rich systems ordinarily migrate Always form close to their parent stars (Is there enough material?) Habitable planets should be more common around metal-poor stars? igure: P-M P from Adibekyan et al. 2013, modified.

44 Different Formation Mechanisms for Hot versus Warm Super-Earths? Figure: Zhu Short- and long-period super-earths show different dependence on the host metallicity: transition at days.

45 Outline 1 Introduction to exoplanets Diversity of exoplanets Planet formation theories 2 Planet formation and metallicity Giant planets Low-mass planets Planets around evolved stars 3 Planet formation: Importance of other elements Heavy elements in the metal-poor regime 4 Planet architecture and metallicity Period, mass, eccentricity, and [Fe/H]: previous works Period-mass diagram and [Fe/H] with SWEET-Cat 5 Conclusion

46 Conclusion Metallicity and planet formation and evolution Metallicity is an important factor for planet formation and evolution Elements other than iron are also important for planet formation Are all the elements equally important? Even low-mass/small-size planets need metals to form Which metals do they need? Orbital parameters may depend on the metallicity (directly or indirectly) Imposes new constraints in the models

47